The effect of allergen‐induced bronchoconstriction on concentration of 5‐oxo‐ETE in exhaled breath condensate of house dust mite‐allergic patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Background Arachidonic acid metabolites regulate several aspects of airway function including inflammation, muscle contraction and mucous secretion. Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate concentration of selected 5‐lipoxygenase‐ and cyclooxygenase‐derived eicosanoids in exhaled breath condensate (EBC) during allergen‐induced bronchoconstriction. Methods The study was performed on 24 allergic rhinitis/asthma patients sensitized to a house dust mite (HDM) Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus (Dp) and 13 healthy controls (HCs). Bronchial challenge with Dp extract was performed only in the allergic patients. EBC samples were collected before (T0) and during Dp‐induced bronchoconstriction (TEAR). Eicosanoid concentration was measured using HPLC‐tandem mass spectrometry. Results Significant bronchoconstriction after Dp challenge was demonstrated in 15 patients (Rs), while in 9 patients (NRs) no asthmatic response could be detected. At T0 the most abundant eicosanoids in EBC of HDM‐allergic patients were LTB4 and 5‐oxo‐ETE, while in HCs EBC concentration of LTB4 was significantly greater than that of 5‐oxo‐ETE. Allergen challenge resulted in significant increase in EBC concentration of 5‐oxo‐ETE, LTD4 and 8‐iso‐PGE2 only in Rs. At TEAR, the relative change of 5‐oxo‐ETE concentration in EBC correlated with decrease of peripheral blood eosinophilia (R = −0.774; P = .0012). Moreover, the relative increase of 5‐oxo‐ETE in EBC at TEAR significantly correlated with the severity of the subsequent late asthmatic response (R = 0.683, P = .007). Conclusion Our study demonstrates significant up‐regulation of 5‐oxo‐ETE synthesis in HDM‐allergic patients and indicates possible involvement of that mediator in the pathogenesis of allergic asthma.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".